(12-30-2016, 06:07 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:Let no one say this game was decided by the refs. Refs did a fine job, first using video to reverse a mistaken out of bounds call, then calling the foul on McCall's shot. Both calls were roundly booed by the home crowd but were clearly correct.
Foolish move by the Arizona ASU center to come out to challenge McCall at the 3-point line with her arm stuck way out. It was a smart, NBA-like play by McCall to take a shot swinging through the arm to create a clear foul.
I do think you are right. I do not think that McCall swung her arm intentionally to get a foul -- I think she took a natural shot. But then I looked at how she got her feet under the shot. McCall did step toward the onrushing defender rather than stay where she was (as Karlie would have) to take the shot.Â
The announcers felt the play, to give McCall a 3pt attempt, was an interesting & good call. It certainly worked well. Fingall's screen did get her free, while Fingall's player was slow to switch to McCall going away from the basket. McCall was able to get the ball and to have a reasonable chance to shoot it within the three seconds available.  But what if she missed? Fingall did a screen to get McCall free, but she didn't switch to blocking her opponent out. Karlie, for reasons I don't understand, stayed out of bounds. Brittany was way on the other side of the court, as was Bri. At least Bri broke toward the basket for a potential rebound. What if McCall was covered? She had no outlet for a second opportunity to get off a quick shot
There appear to be multiple technical (and judgement) errors by the officials on the reversed call.
After calling the ball out on Brittany, the ref signaled that the 30 second clock (then at 7) should be reset. I do not understand that. Three seconds earlier the ASU shooter missed the rim (the ball continued its trajectory and the same rate of backspin, and the net didn't move visibly); no ref signaled that the clock should be reset at the time. It was only after the ball went out of bounds that the ref made the signal. The shot clock (on the TV version of the shot clock was reset to 30).Â
Was the official making some sort of call that the immediate play (out of bounds) required the shot clock reset? Was the official attempting to correct an earlier error? Was the official indicating what he felt should be reviewed?
I found no rule supporting such a reset (without monitor review) unless the ref was ruling that an OBVIOUS error had been made:
Quote:When an obvious mistake by the shot-clock operator has occurred
in failing to start, stop, set or reset the shot clock or when a shot clock has
malfunctioned, the mistake or the malfunctioning problem may be corrected
in the shot-clock period in which it occurred only when the official has
definite information relative to the mistake or malfunctioning problem and
the time involved. -- 2016 & 2017 NCAA Women's Basketball Rules
If the official was trying to rule that the prior shot obviously had hit the rim, I believe the shot clock should not have been reset to 30, but should have been
corrected to about 27. (Had the official ruled that Brittany had intentionally fisted the ball out of bounds, the clock should have been reset to 15.)
However, if monitor review is available, this rule can be used: (emphasis mine)
Quote:Section 2. Instant ReplayVoluntary Use (Except Where Noted)
Art 1. Officials may use such available equipment only in the following
situations:
2. Determine whether the shot clock malfunctioned or a timing mistake
occurred in failing to properly start, stop, set or reset the shot clock. The
malfunction or mistake may only be corrected in the shot clock period
in which it occurred. Any activity after the mistake or malfunction
has been committed and until it has been rectified shall be canceled,
excluding a flagrant 1 or 2 personal foul or any technical foul.
So, if the official believed that the shot may have hit the rim and needed to be reviewed, and review bore that out, then the situation should have been reset back to when the error was made (when the ball hit the rim). There would be no rebound and no out of bounds on Brittany or the ASU player. I presume that this would have resulted in a tie-ball call (as the ball was in no one's possession) with about 51 seconds on the game clock. [This rule seems imperfect. A failure to reset the shot clock should only apply if the offense regains possession after the shot, and the mistake should be judged as of that time, not at the instant that the ball touched the rim, when it is in no one's possession.]
Judging by the amount of time it took to do a review, I suspect that the officials simply looked at the out of bounds call, and felt that the alleged failure to reset the shot clock was irrelevant once the ruling was made that it was Stanford's ball. If they did, I believe they made an incorrect (albeit reasonable) interpretation of the rules. However, it is possible that the officials did review the shot and decided it didn't hit the rim (overturning one of the ref's two on-court calls) and then looked at the out of bounds call (overturning the other call by the ref)
